Wednesday, July 10, 2019

"Facebook has issued a new policy update saying it’s acceptable to post death threats and incite violence against me."

A Community Standards update published by Facebook states (my highlight):

Do not post: Threats that could lead to death (and other forms of high-severity violence) of any target(s) where threat is defined as any of the following:

Statements of intent to commit high-severity violence; or

Calls for high-severity violence (unless the target is an organization or individual covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy...

Here is a copy of the statement:

Here's the kicker and why you can threaten Watson on Facebook without repercussions based on the new policy update.

Back in May, Facebook and Instagram (owned by Facebook) banned Watson under the justification that he was a “dangerous individual." They provided no evidence whatsoever that Watson had ever behaved in a “dangerous” manner or violated any of their policies.

"They are painting a target on my back," says Watson.

This is a positively bizarre action by Facebook and shows the evil of its ever-expanding censorship program and its extensive anti-right bias.

Lefty Valley is truly nuts and fears open discussion and opposing views. It is the enemy of all truth-seekers. Its tools should only be used with the understadning that one is behind enemy lines when using such.

UPDATE

Following a backlash, Facebook has completely deleted the section that allowed violence to be incited against “dangerous individuals”.

If FB is not doing a fair job, then you compete with FB by providing a more fair service and all the customers will leave FB and come to you. That's what is so great about libertarianism and free markets. Wrong - google "network effect". Then learn about propertarianism.

These "private companies" (like most of the tech companies) are critically dependent on the government-granted monopoly aka "Intellectual Property". FB went even further by both massively violating IP rights (in form of personal information) of their users and allowing de-facto pirating of the 3rd party content on massive scale, while keeping others out of their walled software garden using the IP protections. In a sane world a judge would've forced Facebook to either stop monetizing customer data without express permission per every and each piece of that data OR to open up their systems and software to everyone because estoppel clearly applies.